Claim: An action is morally correct if the amount of good that results from the action is greater than the amount of bad that results from the action.
Reason: When assessing the morality of an action, the results of an action are more important than the intent of the person or people performing that action.
Any action which is performed by an individual has to take various factors into consideration. An action which is perceived as moral by a particular sector of people in the society may even face rebuttals from another half of the same society. Most of the times the intention with which the action is performed results in the predicted results, however, there might be certain cases when the prognostications of an actions would be counter-productive. Hence it is not the results of an action which is important, but rather the intent with which the individual has performed it.
To begin with, good and bad may vary from person to person according to their own definition. For instance, consider the case of a child who is condemned by his mother for performing a wrong deed. The intension of the mother is to make the child immune to wrong deeds in the world for his future growth. But, the child may perseive in a wrong way that he tries to prevaricate when he performs another wrong act. In this scenario, one cannot say that the action performed by either the mother or the child is bad. It is the way in which a certain act is perceived differently by two different people which leads to opposite results. Had the child understood the intension of his mother, then there would not be dire consequences. Hence, it is the perception which matters rather than the intension to provide a result of a consequence.
There might be certain cases when it is difficult to interpret the intent of an action. During such cases, it might be possible to evaluate the result. For instance, consider the recent action taken by the government of India regarding Demonitization-invadidating the higher denominated currency notes-whose actions gained mixed responses from the public. The supporters of the action believe that the action can eradicate the black money growing in the nation and thus lead to better economic gains. In contrast, there are some economists who argue that these actions would lead to inflation in the economy rather than doing good to the society. During such a scenario with mixed responses it is not possible to evaluate either the action nor the result of the action.
There might be certain cases when the results of the actions must be taken into account than the intent of the person who has performed the action. If the boss of a employee always condemns him for his performance, it would provide deleterious effects to the company irrespective of whether the notion of the boss is because of some personal grudge or the performance of the employee. In such cases, as the results are bad, irrespective of the intension, the act is not moral.
In conclusion, it is difficult most of the times to evaluate the intension as well as the results of an action. The intension holds a better edge compared to the actions in certain scenarios. If the results are too harmful to a person, community or an organization, then irrespective of the intension of the action, it must be perceived as amoral.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-29 | Gre user | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-17 | aryastark282 | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | thinker3000 | 33 | view |
| 2019-09-11 | thinker3000 | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-11 | Md. Mehdi Hasan | 58 | view |
- A person who knowingly commits a crime has broken the social contract and should not retain any civil rights or the right to benefit from his or her own labor.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim a 50
- The best way to teach—whether as an educator, employer, or parent—is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your 69
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 50
- Altruism is a type of behavior in which an animal sacrifices its own interest for that of another animal or group of animals. Altruism is the opposite of selfishness; individuals performing altruistic acts gain nothing for themselves. Examples of altruism 80
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 413, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an action' or simply 'actions'?
Suggestion: an action; actions
...tain cases when the prognostications of an actions would be counter-productive. Hence it i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 453, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...an actions would be counter-productive. Hence it is not the results of an action whic...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 333, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a wrong way" with adverb for "wrong"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ure growth. But, the child may perseive in a wrong way that he tries to prevaricate when he pe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 164, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...as performed the action. If the boss of a employee always condemns him for his pe...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, thus, well, as to, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 75.0 58.6224719101 128% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2509.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 518.0 442.535393258 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84362934363 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77070365392 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9369432112 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.407335907336 0.4932671777 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 785.7 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6701456881 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.541666667 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.70833333333 5.21951772744 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.41523498347 0.243740707755 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135968386413 0.0831039109588 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0948928618872 0.0758088955206 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.269508433082 0.150359130593 179% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.107234056151 0.0667264976115 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.